buzzman

Thanks for providing an alternative site. I don't necessarily agree with every conclusion on the BHSI site. Particularly with regards mandated helmet laws. But I do think it provides plenty of information to balance some of the other sites referenced. If you don't like the BHSI site take it up with them.

With regard personal experience I do still hold that foremost in what shapes my decision making around helmets. For example Sudo Bike referenced the "risk compensation" behavioral psychology studies as evidence that people wearing bike helmets are more likely to take risks than non-helmet wearing cyclists. I question the application of that theory to helmet wearing because I have not seen it borne out in my personal experience or observation.

This evening I put it to an informal, non-scientific, non-vetted, totally subjective test. But, for what it's worth, I'll share to demonstrate what I mean about personal experience.

Today I rode into downtown Boston to see a 3 pm matinee of a play my wife was doing. It was a sunny warm October day and the bike path was crowded on the way into town. A testament to the success of the new Hub Bike Share program was how many of the riders on the path were on the Bike Share bikes. I began to take notice of how many helmeted and non-helmeted riders and to make distinctions as to their behavior while riding. It ended up to be too much data. I couldn't keep track because there were so many riders. But one thing was obvious the Bike Share riders were by far the most discourteous, distracted, dangerous riders on the path and none of them wore helmets.

The quick conclusion here would be no helmet/bad rider but the Bike Share program doesn't provide helmets (it might be less popular if it did and if it required them even less so) and the Bike Share riders tend to be tourists, traveling in groups, on vacation, out for fun and in unfamiliar territory. The helmeted riders looked like the usual bike commuting/recreational crowd, who use the bike path regularly. So I don't think helmet or not helmet really changed anyone's behavior it just was what it was. So I threw out that study as inconclusive.

But the ride home was a different story. It was now night time. Fewer riders and I had one risky behavior as a constant- the use of lights. I also observed other behaviors, which I'll detail, but primarily I looked for the lights no lights/helmet no helmet combinations. Once again the bike share program skewed the results- this time in the non-helmeted riders favor. The Bike Share bikes have built in lighting systems.

I saw a total of 29 riders on my ride home.

15 were not wearing helmets.

14 were wearing helmets.

6 were on Bike Share bikes and all of them were not wearing helmets but they had, by default, lights.

12 of the helmeted riders had lights and some had supplemental reflective gear.

2 helmeted riders had no lights.

Of the 9 non-helmeted riders on other than Bike Share bikes, 0 (zero) had lights.

I did see one classic ninja cyclist, which I would never have seen except he was briefly silhouetted against the Boston sky line. I chased him down and there he was ahead of me, wearing a tight black t-shirt on a black single speed with hacksawed narrow upright bars, the stubby kryptonite lock jammed in the back pocket of his black skinny jeans. He was fast and smooth on the bike and I was pretty convinced as I approached he had on the coolest black helmet I'd ever seen but as I jammed up close to him approaching Harvard Square I could see in the glow of the streetlight a full head of jet black curly hair- no helmet. I caught him but he ran the red light and off he went right along with any faith I might have had in risk compensation theory.